The Telegraph Most Rev Stephen Cottrell: ‘My time at a girls’ school may have saved my life’
“The Archbishop of York recalls his days of truancy and the revelations of school life in Essex before he found faith as a teenager.”
Helen King ViaMedia.News Another Year Gone: What’s Wrong with the Church of England?
House of Survivors Round up of 2022
Adrian Hilton The Spectator In praise of the Church of England
Ian Paul Psephizo How can we overcome class divisions in the church?
The article on class which was posted this week on Ian Paul’s Psephizo site is well worth a read, as are the comments made beneath it. To what extent do people feel alienated by social assumptions of middle-middle, and upper-middle class, people in the Church of England? And to what extent is that a reflection of actual discrepancies and inequalities in the UK today? I admit to privilege I myself was born into, with family in Burkes Peerage, private education, sports fixtures at Eton, large gardens in childhood etc. I can’t be blamed for those beginnings. However, almost a lifetime… Read more »
I’d like to offer Helen a fifth and ‘opposition’ for reflection: Spirituality v. Practical Social Engagement. Both can be virtues and channels of grace, but not if one excludes the other. On these often thought-provoking pages here at ‘Thinking Anglicans’, I think there’s something of a silence on ways of practising ‘spirituality’ in terms of prayer and daily spiritual routine. Probably because it seems private, or inward-looking, or elitist. There are few references to our religious houses – the communities in convent or monastery. And yet these can be deeply instructive, living out prayer life in community. Of course, yes,… Read more »
Ian Paul asks questions but it’s almost as if the answers are unpalatable. As the son of a Scunthorpe steelworker and a hospital admin clerk, I was the exception at Westcott. I was sort of welcome but only if I conformed to the middle class ways of being an ordinand in the CofE. Without it being articulated as such it was made clear in the first few days that I would need to squeeze myself into their jelly mould if I was to be tolerated. It was only toleration too: I would be asked to repeat phrases so my fellow… Read more »
When I was at theological college the Principal invited Michael Ramsey, then Archbishop, to officiate at the private Confirmation of his posh daughters in the college Chapel, to which we students were invited. One of our number pointed out, to the Principal’s horror, he was preparing some rather rough young men for confirmation on his placement in Borstal. He suggested it would be convenient if the Archbishop confirmed his daughters with the juvenile delinquents at the same service in College. The Principal couldn’t wriggle out of this horrible suggestion. To witness the congregation of young offenders in bovver boots confirmed… Read more »
I found that the really posh people were usually delightful, it was the aspirational middle class church people who were more likely to be the snootiest. In one of my placement parishes there was an elderly lady whose father had been the Dean of Durham and from a top drawer family in any event. Jo often wore shoes with the sole coming away from the upper and could be seen walking through the centre of Hereford late at night on her way to or from a shift at the Samaritans. In those days you could pop into the office for… Read more »
This reminds me of Fiona Hill’s book There is Nothing for You Here about educational experiences of prejudice growing up in Bishop Auckland after the coal mines closed..
I don’t know how much the place where they were educated affects the attitude and conduct of CofE clergy and worshippers. I do believe, however, from experience, that the CofE in certain parishes, is snobbish. The CofE is sometimes characterised as ‘the Tory party at prayer’. That does seem, from my experience, to be true. Personally, I don’t believe there is any structural adjustment that could make the CofE more attractive to that part of the population that is no longer engaged in Christian religious practice, or to be more precise, Anglican religious practice. The change needs to come from… Read more »
I don’t think it’s correct to describe the CofE as the Tory party at prayer in that middle England is far more likely to be socially liberal; that’s where the power resides these days. Anglicans are usually desperate to fit in with the prevailing culture and tend to veer towards the liberal left as a result.
I’ve not met many Anglicans who were intent on fitting in with the prevailing culture. I assume this is just code for disagreeing with you on something on which you’re socially conservative? The idea that the “prevailing culture” is liberal left is also not supported by the evidence, whether of the performative abuse directed at trans people, or the deliberate cruelty directed at people seeking asylum, both cheered on by the mainstream media and supported by the current government. A lot of (particularly English) Anglicans are tories, whether more so than others their age is open to question but with… Read more »
There’s quite a lot of evidence to suggest that when society as a whole was socially conservative the Church of England was too; with the gradual liberalisation of society the Church of England followed suit. I think this is inevitable with a state church. And I’m referring to the Church’s leaders when I refer to the liberal left bias. I agree that many ordinary men and women in the pew are conservative in their views but these views are routinely dismissed or even vilified by the ecclesiastical hierarchy.
I would perhaps tend to the view that what changed the views of the clergy were corresponding changes to their economic position. The clergy were for long a conservative profession, because their incomes depended upon relatively precarious entitlements to tithe (which put them in the position of de facto tax collectors) and relatively secure entitlements to glebe (which made them petty landowners). If they wanted to advance financially, then they had to secure the patronage of someone who had the gift of a valuable living: this created a community of interest between the clerical profession and the propertied. When those… Read more »
It seems to me that the CofE reflects the culture from which it draws its members, which is not a surprise. That’s rather different from being “desperate to fit in” as you allege.
Frankly, there are plenty of conservative views that should be vilified because they are contrary to the Gospel. You can’t, for example, advocate sinking boats carrying asylum seekers, as suggested by too many conservatives, and be surprised if church leaders criticise.
It must be very satisfying to have discovered a creed which you believes absolves you from all worldly sins without effort and entitles you to consign unbelievers to perdition without lifting a finger. Unfortunately socialism does neither of those, nor does any other purely political belief.
I imagine it must be. Do you have anything to contribute to the discussion at hand?
Like others, I contribute my opinions on the issues under discussion. One of those opinions is that it is possible to be a Christian without being a socialist: indeed, that a creed such as socialism, which gives priority to the collective over the individual, is fundamentally at odds with Christianity which gives priority to the relationship of each individual soul with God.
A further contribution might be based on Luke 8:9-14 and Matthew 7:1-5, leading on to Matthew 7:15 and 24:11
I would suggest that Christianity has at its heart a willingness to sacrifice one’s own wellbeing, even one’s life, for the good of others. The “personal relationship with Jesus” emphasis is actually an adoption of the individualistic spirit of the age.
Unfortunately socialism, as a purely worldly creed, exhibits rather too strong a tendency to sacrifice the well-being of others. If you think that a personal relationship with Jesus is not at the heart of Christianity, then our understandings are so far at odds as to make dialogue almost impossible.
I don’t agree with your understanding of socialism or your understanding of Christianity, so perhaps we’d best leave it at that.
Can’t the two go hand in hand? A personal relationship with Jesus encourages us to emulate him in his attitude of self sacrifice.
I find the notion of a ‘personal relationship’ with Jesus problematic. I do not know how one can have a ‘personal relationship’ with a deceased historical figure. What is possible is a spiritual relationship with Jesus the Christ via word and sacrament. Many years ago an evangelical bishop asked me: “Have you accepted Jesus? “. I replied with, “Well I received Communion this morning, if that’s what you mean”. When one considers the entire narrative in the Gospels, it is very clear that the picture painted of Jesus historically is that his call to repentance and invitation to accept the… Read more »
‘I find the notion of a ‘personal relationship’ with Jesus problematic.’
As compared to, say, the idea of eating someone’s body and drinking their blood?
Yes, good comparison by contrast in fact. The presence of Christ in the Eucharist is not physical, historical, or even ‘personal’ in the cotemporary sense. I think Joachim Jeremias has the best analysis i.e. we eat and drink in order to remember Jesus before God, as he asked. It is a chaburah like meal (Dix) in which the presence of Christ at many meals during his lifetime is in the Hebrew sense actively called to mind. His presence and our ‘eating and drinking’ is purely sacramental. As Schillebeeckz taught, Christ is himself a sacrament. I think the confusion in all… Read more »
An interesting opinion, but not, I suggest, an Anglican view?
I reckon I’m in good company then. Gregory Dix had to contend with the same kind of reaction. I recall a liturgical workshop some years back. The focus was the then new liturgical texts in the Canadian Book of Alternative services. One of the local academics, a Prayer Book catholic, was holding forth about how this was a departure from a distinctive Anglican perspective. His view was that Dix’s, Shape of Liturgy ” …is behind all this”. There are things I agree with regarding each of the three chaps mentioned above, one an Anglican, one Lutheran, one R.C. Most eucharistic… Read more »
I find it strange to think Jesus saying “this is my body” at the Last Supper is a “problematic idea”.
It’s been problematic for outsiders ever since the days of early Christianity when Christians were accused of being cannibals. It’s still problematic today for some unchurched people who come into a service and encounter it for the first time (I remember the shock of a good friend who had accepted my invitation to church and could not believe I wanted her to bring her daughter every week to hear language like that). Likewise, to some, the language of a personal relationship with Christ is problematic, but to those of us for whom it is central to our faith, it’s simply… Read more »
Tim, I was baptized into the body of Christ when I was several weeks old. My participation in the same as a consequence is full and complete via word and sacrament. I did not need/do not need the additional altar call like contrivance suggested by the good evangelical bishop of ‘accepting/receiving Jesus’ in my life in order to get out of economy and fly first class with Jesus. Notwithstanding, I do understand what you are holding for here. The passage from Philippians (3: 7-14) is about faith and eschatological hope. While St. Paul cannot be read as systematically consistent I… Read more »
‘I did not need/do not need the additional altar call like contrivance suggested by the good evangelical bishop of ‘accepting/receiving Jesus’ in my life in order to get out of economy and fly first class with Jesus.’ I’m glad this was true for you, Rod; I know many others who would echo your words. However, it was definitely not true for me, at least, not in a subjective sense. I didn’t respond to an altar call (that would have been far too much for a shy introvert), but I did make a personal commitment of my life to Christ. I… Read more »
Re: “flying first class with Jesus.” Sarcasm. Guilty! Call it a weakness. However, in writing that I was thinking of my reaction to the question of the good bishop (and others like him I have encountered since) which seems grounded in a lack of understanding, let alone respect, for the completeness of Christian initiation. It has also exuded a kind of ‘in group’ vibe when I’ve come across it. I have not made the kind of commitment you describe in the manner in which you describe it. Never felt the need. However, you have articulated your position very well. Be… Read more »
Your path and journey with God very much mirrors my own. Up to the day of conversion, the concept ‘God’ was very much that to me: a concept, somewhere out there, an idea, a partial intuition, but not personal. Then I encountered Jesus, and He wasn’t a concept. He was a person. One of the persons of God. What followed was relationship, year on year, day by day, prayer by prayer… and friendship, and devotion. I completely accept that there are many pathways people may take that incline them towards God. But my own experience seems similar to yours. I’m… Read more »
[I have clicked reply to Susannah because she expresses the point most clearly but I am really replying to several people.] It’s interesting that people say they have a “personal relationship with Jesus” because I would say that my personal relationship has always been with YHWH. It was He, not Jesus, who first spoke to me and that’s the being I sense. St Paul also describes having a personal relationship with the Father rather than the Son so I don’t think a “personal relationship with Jesus” is necessary according to Scripture. Indeed the Bible is full of people having a… Read more »
‘St Paul also describes having a personal relationship with the Father rather than the Son so I don’t think a “personal relationship with Jesus” is necessary according to Scripture.’
Um – ‘I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the sharing of his sufferings’ (Phil. 3.10).
I’m not sure how it is in the original but personally I read that as wanting to experience what Christ went through to better understand Him. Knowing Paul, he also wanted to share in those sufferings to better witness to others. I don’t get any sense of Paul seeing that shared experiences would form a personal relationship between him and Jesus.
Sorry, but “I want to know Christ” seems pretty clear to me (especially given that to the ancients ‘know’ was usually experiential).
The eucharistic words of Jesus are not ‘problematic’ within the context of the last supper narratives or in St. Paul. We have a change of cultural context and Greek philosophy to thank for turning the symbolic meaning of a particular kind of meal into a metaphysical conundrum.
It would be a rabbit hole I suggest we don’t go down in detail on this thread, but in the context of the divine, I think it is possible that the symbolic, metaphysical and physical are not distinct.
That reflects a cannibalistic style of eucharistic theology that S Thomas Aquinas was at pains to distance the Church from in the 13th Century. Word will get through to Canada in due course.
Sorry, SA, but those dismissive comments don’t do you much credit. My friend had never read any theology – she had accepted my invitation to ‘Back to Church Sunday’, and we had our regular weekly Eucharist, and she heard words that sounded very unfamiliar and shocking to her. Surprisingly, most unchurched Canadians have not read Thomas Aquinas.
What a thrill they have in store!
Tim, this is great fun. I have a solution for you (below). I have no doubt the unchurched can have the difficulty you mention. Likewise, the ‘churched’ can have an opposing difficulty. A little story as a prologue to a long winded but ultimately partially tongue in cheek comment regarding Aquinas. Bear with me. When I was a Canadian high school student in Catholic parochial school in days of yore, I had the benefit of a great number of chats with our Values Education coordinator. He was a Roman Catholic priest who latter became a friend. In one of these… Read more »
There was a TV ad here a while back espousing the benefits of ersatz butter called “I can’t believe it’s not butter”. Perhaps the Liturgy at the Elevation should include the response “I can’t believe it’s not Jesus”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37ficiqoE6U
lol. Had that here as well. Remember a cartoon with grave markers each with the epitaph, “I can’t believe it’s not butter.” Perhaps we could have as the dismissal: “Jesus has left the building!”.
Hilarious! I love it! Although in my neck of the woods, an additional translation in Mandarin, Cantonese, or a Middle Eastern language might pick up more customers than French! Thanks Rod for making my afternoon!
So nice that you find it amusing. I wonder whether anyone has ever suggested that mocking sacred things might be harmful to the spiritual condition of others? Or that “only joking” is the motto of the bully?
IMO, there is nothing so unChristian as a lack of a sense of humor.
Predictable, and, indeed predicted.
IOW, you find my stance to be consistent. Good–I can take pride in that.
The “faith” of those to whom such remarks are harmful must be very precarious. Challenge provokes growth. Or maybe the church needs a posse of religious police to root out heresy in thought and praxis. Once upon a time (thrice actually) I taught anatomy to trainee surgeons in Buraydah, Saudi Arabia, the home of the training college for Saudi religious police, the mutawa. These puritans patrol the streets with sticks ensuring that shops close for prayers. They are on the lookout for bare female flesh that they can whack. Foreigners are not exempt: a female colleague, head to ankle in… Read more »
I was thinking somewhat along those lines. Your riff ” I can’t believe it’s not Jesus” with an appropriate drawing would make a great religious cartoon. On that subject, and further to the point you make in this comment, I am thinking of the earful that the Iranian ambassador gave the government of France last week over the cartoons from the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. Apparently France was told in no uncertain terms that when it comes to using freedom of speech to challenge religious authority, we are not amused. Political cartoons are a good example of how satire and… Read more »
… and let’s not forget “Life of Brian” and the reaction of Bishop Stockwood et al: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYMpObbt2rs
It has been a great many years since I’ve seen that entire segment. Interesting that Muggeridge and the Bishop are trying to hang an argument about corrupting the minds of the youth on Cleese and Palin–which is what Socrates was accused of. There is a parody of the debate itself featuring Rowan Atkinson. It should be at the bottom of the piece in the link below. I think Cleese had the best lines in the original debate. And as the guy noted, who expects a comedian to reference Karl Popper. Anyway, in for a penny in for a pound.
https://reason.com/2019/11/08/monty-python-meets-the-bishop/
‘I wonder whether anyone has ever suggested that mocking sacred things might be harmful to the spiritual condition of others?’
I’m sorry you find it distressing, UN, but if you read carefully, you’ll see that I am not mocking sacred things. I’m chuckling at the convoluted theological/philosophical language in which Aquinas attempts to describe a particular theological understanding of those sacred things.
“I’m sorry you find it distressing … if you read carefully”
The classic non apology. I did read carefully. The exchange went like this
RG: ““I can’t believe it’s not butter.”” … “Perhaps we could have as the dismissal: “Jesus has left the building!”.”
TC: “Hilarious! I love it!”
Not the language of Aquinas. Now, seriously, do you accept that there is such a thing as blasphemy, and that it may cause spiritual harm, or not?
Blasphemy is it. Ouch! Thankfully I don’t live in a theocracy, and I’m unapologetically plum out of hair-shirts. Everything you quoted above pokes fun at a particular scholastic viewpoint. I suggest if you think about it for awhile, you may come to the realization that your comment is a tad lacking in perspective. Your take on all of this reminds me of the debate on British TV between John Cleese and Malcolm Muggeridge over the film, Life of Brian. Poor old Muggeridge came off as something of a killjoy.
Dear UN.
Something weird is happening with the comment thread here. I have noticed that the order of comments is getting mixed up. My comment “Hilarious! I love it!” was in response to Rod’s comment here, in which he quoted Thomas Aquinas’ piece. When I wrote that comment, the ‘I can’t believe it’s not butter/Jesus has left the building” comments had not yet been posted. You are accusing me of laughing at something that I had not yet seen.
If I have misunderstand your comments, then of course I withdraw my criticism. What is important in this discussion is whether you accept that mocking sacred things can be spiritually harmful. Would you care to commit yourself on that question?
‘What is important in this discussion is whether you accept that mocking sacred things can be spiritually harmful.’
The word ‘discussion’ implies that two people are having a conversation they are both interested in. When one person advances a proposition and demands that the other person respond to it, I would not personally describe that as a discussion. Especially when one of the people involved is entirely open about who they are, and the other is not.
It is the currently accepted practice in discussions on this site for participants to remain anonymous or pseudonymous if they wish.
I believe there is a constructive discussion to be had about blasphemy and spiritual harm, for those minded to take part seriously.
‘I believe there is a constructive discussion to be had about blasphemy and spiritual harm, for those minded to take part seriously.’
I’m sure there is, but it doesn’t interest me, as it isn’t the conversation I was having on this thread, and I don’t appreciate your demanding that I take part in it.
Yes, I’m well aware of the convention around anonymity/pseudonymity on TA. I personally find it a barrier to open engagement.
And now I’m bowing out of this one.
I think we need to better define “mocking sacred things”. On my side of the pond, there’s a consistent trope in editorial cartoons in which, when a famous person dies, he/she is depicted being greeted at the Gates of Heaven by St. Peter who welcomes the new arrival with a (hopefully) humorous and topical comment. As an example, when Peter Graves (of “Mission: Impossible”) died, I suggested the following: He stands before the Gates and St. Peter says, “I’m sorry, Mr. Graves, the secretary has disavowed any knowledge of your actions….” Is that, in your view, a blasphemous mocking of… Read more »
Joking, humour and satire can actually be pretty effective counter measures to bullying. Check out Charlie Chaplin’s, The Great Dictator, The Whole Globe scene. Religion just begs for satire, don’t you find? A sense of humour can also be very biblical. Note the subtle humour in the story of Jonah and the big fish. Jonah’s flees God and God has him swallowed by a big fish and coughed up exactly where God wanted him. The story is virtually ‘pythonesque’. I certainly can’t take it seriously. Or consider the humour in Matthew 22:27. After seven husbands, the woman herself died. No… Read more »
As I predicted, a classic continuation of bullying behaviour by people who are apparently ministers of the church who have had pastoral responsibility for others. Shameful.
Your comment trivializes real bullying.
In the interests of removing the personal element from the discussion … let’s try to confine it to whether you accept that mocking sacred things can be spiritually harmful. Would you care to commit yourself on that question?
Who art thou? Art thou the Elias? Art thou Malcolm the Muggeridge returned from the dead? cheers, mate.
I thought my reply to this yesterday, which has not appeared for some reason, expressed très drôle my estimation of the state of the question. This aspect of the ‘discussion’ reminds me of the drama over ‘fuddle duddle’ in parliament here back in the 70s. You may consider it a privilege to debate with someone like me who is transparent about who they are. We shall now consider that privilege concluded.Cheerio.
Thanks to the moderators for getting to my comments. I was wondering If my attempt at humour had been read as a faux pas. A footnote to this second one for readers outside Canada who may not know about my reference to ‘fuddle duddle’. In 1971 it was alleged by the opposition that the then P.M. Pierre Trudeau had used an expletive in The House. He denied it claiming he had said ‘fuddle duddle’. What followed was a lot of the usual political theatre in the form of faux outrage. It’s my opinion that some faux outrage and overwrought rhetoric… Read more »
I will be saying ‘Cheerio’ to TA, for the next little while at least. The vast majority of the news/opinion here is Church of England-centred, which is obviously what the site is all about. So I think it’s time for me, anyway, to step out and leave y’all to it. Blessings and peace.
Tim, I think I am going to follow your lead. I’ve been mulling it over for awhile, so consider your comment an encouraging nudge. ( I am retired and this is getting to be too much like work). Thanks for all the exchanges. Blessings.
Perhaps I could be described as an unreliable humorist. I could also use a proof reader. That should be bred-in-the bone (above). Speaking of which. stream of consciousness brings me to, What’s Bred in the Bone, brings me in turn to Robertson Davies. Engaging writer on the subject of religion with more than a touch of the drôle.
Of course that notion — of a personal relationship with someone who lived an died two thousand years ago, and yet rose again and is the same person as the Second Person of the Trinity, which is God — is deeply problematic. We believe that it is a vital necessity, and reiterate that belief every time we say the Creed. All else follows.
The resurrection per se is outside the horizon of history. Appeals to the creeds, like appeals to ‘miracles’, are usually intended to close the gaps left by evidence. Thankfully we have scriptural mythos which shows how limited and limiting the contemporary notion of a ‘personal’ relationship with the historical Jesus is. See above my comment to my colleague Tim.
There are many people for whom the Creed expresses their belief, and many for whom it does not. I can claim no understanding of those who recite the Creed when they believe something different.
Hans Kung’s book, Credo, might be of interest to you in terms of a broader understanding.
Please point out to me where in the Nicene Creed there is any reference to a “personal relationship with Christ,” because, for the life of me, I cannot find one.
My reference to the Creed was specifically with reference to Jesus as “someone who lived and died two thousand years ago, and yet rose again and is the same person as the Second Person of the Trinity, which is God”, a position which is not accepted by some of those who comment here. The crux of our relationship with Him is alluded to in the phrase He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead at which point each of us will find the nature of our relationship determined. If anyone believes they do not have,… Read more »
We clearly differ on the extent to which the historic creeds close out further development or are effective rejoinders to modern scholarship. However reproduced below is the portion of my original comment from a day ago in response to William, which you took issue with: “I do not know how one can have a ‘personal relationship’ with a deceased historical figure. What is possible is a spiritual relationship with Jesus the Christ via word and sacrament.” I suggest that this is perfectly consonant with the creeds. Did you misunderstand the reference to “Jesus the Christ”? On the other hand, the… Read more »
Rod, can I respectfully suggest that the use of ‘Jesus the Christ’ to refer to the divine figure of the Logos, as distinct from the historical person of Jesus of Nazareth – which I assume is what you’re doing here – is a little dated now? ‘Christ’ = ‘Messiah’, and Messiah is not a divine Logos, but a descendant of David who will lead God’s people to freedom. Very much a this-worldly, first century Jewish figure.
Let me see if I can keep this concise. I agree with the implication of your question i.e. that the application of the term ‘Christ’ to the historical Jesus is an interpretation of an interpretation. What I need here and now is a way of expressing the continuity of the Jesus of history with the eschatological Jesus of the resurrection, a way of connecting the Jesus of history to the proclamation of the Church about Jesus. As you point out, ‘Christ’ is a title. As such it expresses this continuity; but its application to Jesus also clarifies and ‘customizes’, if… Read more »
And we are rather nervous about raising the issue of Freemasonry which I know some are concerned about.
I can’t even begin to imagine how anyone’s participation in the craft would keep anyone else away from church. If masonry does its job well and produces better men then it seems to me you’d have parishes more welcoming and filled with people living a life that would attract more people. I know that I am a better Christian, a better human, a better man, because of what I have learned in the fraternity.
But do let’s bring out some old conspiracy fears. Might as well bang on that drum while we are at it.
Ah, yes, ‘self-made men worshipping their maker!’ That rather good report (thirty years’ ago?) which declared Freemasonry incompatible with Christianity remains the CofE position. I think Christina Baxter was on the group that wrote it.
I’m not sure it *declared* anything of the sort (if we’re talking about the 1987 report) – IIRC it said there were ‘serious questions’ about the ‘compatibility’ of Freemasonry and Christianity, and urged further work to be done on the subject? I mean, IMO ‘incompatible’ was very much where the authors of the report wanted to go, but they didn’t get there, and it is certainly not an authoritative statement of doctrine. Rowan Williams came the closest to saying ‘absolutely not’ (and even he managed to appoint a freemason as a bishop – though the furore forced said bishop to… Read more »
Perhaps o/t here but it may have escaped thd attention of some readers that at the very end of the very long thread on Martin Sargeant below, at comment 83, Rowland Wateridge notes that Martin Sargeant was appointed to sone church posts before his convictions were spent; and for a couple of directorships he is listed as a “clerk in holy orders”..As Rowland observes on that thread this suggests that someone in the diocese wasn’t doing due diligence.
Martin Sargeant was a director and company secretary at different times, both before and after his previous conviction was spent. It’s far from clear how, or by whom, he was appointed to these posts. I think you have to have an account with Companies House – which I do not – to access some of the papers and records about company formation and appointment of directors and officers. I’m sure that the CPS has already covered all of this ground. I provided enough detail for interested TA readers to look further. Yours has been the only response! The ‘Daily Mail’… Read more »
Unfortunately I do not have a Companies House account of the type to which you refer, so I cannot go further. But I’m afraid I think it is rather too easy to keep avoiding some significant points in this case. You refer to the possibility of ‘journalist’s hindsight’. What the journalist is actually doing is reporting that Mr Sargeant himself has said that ‘the church’ was told of his previous convictions (and this might fit very well with your point that some of his appointments did indeed pre-date the period when his convictions became spent). ‘The church’ has not denied… Read more »
I do not understand, nor do I appreciate, the critical tone of this comment and your reference to “avoiding some significant points”. I have gone to great lengths to try to assist by providing clear pointers and the necessary links to the Companies House entries for Martin Sargeant. It is up to TA readers who are sufficiently interested to follow up those links and you will find sufficient information for present purposes without the Companies House subscription. Within each company heading you need to search under ‘people’ and ‘filing history’. It’s not overly difficult, although possibly tedious, but the groundwork… Read more »
Without in any way disagreeing, I think no functionary should be trusted regardless of his or her past. Procedures should have been in place, and in use, which were based on the premise that every functionary might be acting dishonestly and at all times demonstrate that he or she is not.
I agree! But to understand what has happened in this case it really is necessary to cross-reference what was said on the previous thread; the links I referred to are in comment 83 which, as it happens, was also in reply to PatrickT. That number speaks for itself! It has been incredibly frustrating to point out the effect of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act and the sensible precaution of the Church (or any employer) to effect fidelity guarantee insurance in respect of an employee or officer entrusted with large sums of money, for the law to be airily brushed aside… Read more »
It’s not really possible to unpick the details of Martin Sargeant’s frauds from public data. But we can see one thing rather clearly. The frauds involved the City Churches grants, for which he was clerk. That fund is part of the Trust for London, not the London Diocesan Fund, and as I have commented previously, the Trust for London has a double trust structure, complicating its oversight and diluting responsibility. Undoubtedly this confused and confusing structure made, and continues to make, fraud easier.
I was aware of that but hoped that for TA purposes this matter had been sufficiently discussed and could be considered closed. The Charity Commission site confirmed the bald details as you have stated. There is much of interest and relevance in the Companies House documents, and I even found something in Hansard. I feel that I have contributed more than enough to these two threads. It’s a matter for the C of E, in whatever guise, and possibly the Charity Commission, to establish what happened and to take remedial action. The CPS must have already unravelled all the details… Read more »
I find class fascinating as someone who grew up on a council estate to very firmly working class parents. Yet from a comprehensive school I then went to Oxford, have a PhD and have all the hallmarks of very firm middle class identity. Which am I? In church I find the same, I am a very obvious conservative evangelical yet don’t fit the Anglican accent or cult like devotion to discredited individuals or groups. I suppose my reflection is that I am both, both a working class bloke who drives an over loud old V8 in a stone island hoodie,… Read more »
Key quotes for me from Ian’s excellent interview with Natalie Williams:
‘I also know of someone who stopped coming to Sunday meetings because she couldn’t read the song words on the screen. Something like that shouldn’t be an insurmountable issue – you shouldn’t have to be able to read to participate in church meetings.’
‘I think the onus is on the majority to let themselves be made uncomfortable, so that newcomers, especially those who might feel they don’t fit in, feel more comfortable among us.’
All in all, a very thought-provoking article.
The changing vocabulary in today’s Church (“song words” for hymns, “church meetings” instead of services) shows an attempt to appeal to the non-churched by ensuring they’re not frightened off by the more usual terminology. Attempts by the middle-class-led HTB franchise to invite common people to “meetings” where they can have an informal dinner-party, where Jesus is discussed, sounds awful to most secular, working-class ears .Many ordinary parishes today are simply a focal point for warmth and friendship, where provisions may be offered from a Food Bank. There are many working-class parishes which are as far from the “Tory party at… Read more »
Yes indeed, Fr. So why is it that churches in working class areas, often huge barns, with at best one paid cleric, are more likely to be underfunded or closed than those in leafy suburbs with more than their fair share of the comfortably-off who are able to give of time, money and energy. This question should be directed, of course, at the decision makers in offices and on synods – synods, please note, that are made up of the comfortably-off who are able to give of time, money and energy, and that are curiously lacking in people from working… Read more »
Note that Natalie Williams is quite clear that she is not an Anglican, so it’s not surprising that she doesn’t use Anglican-speak. And I’m not quite sure why the word ‘service’ is any more appropriate for worship than ‘meeting’, which is the word that St. Paul uses for Eucharistic gatherings in 1 Corinthians 11. I’m not ‘secular’ or working class any more (though I was born in a working class family in inner-city Leicester), so I wouldn’t presume to make any bold pronouncements about what might or might not sound awful to people who are. As for the Tory party… Read more »
I was referring to Valerie Aston’s assertion (above) that the CofE is the Tory Party at Prayer. Despite an Old Etonian Archbishop and privately-educated HTB leaders, the Church is much more ” the liberal party with guitars” (except on matters of sexuality where it’s the National Front).
Screens are also difficult for the visually impaired and those with learning difficulties. Unless they’re positioned correctly wheelchair users also need to be able to bend their necks to see the words.
Spot on, Father. There can also be problems with reflected light from nearby windows and, particularly annoying, operators putting up the words verse by verse with a laptop (or whatever) and get them in the wrong order…….
I agree that there are sometimes problems with screens. I have also been in many churches where the print in the hymn books is far too small for the visually impaired. Also, I have had a few complaints that our hymn books don’t include music – only lyrics – apparently some people (a small group) want to sing the harmonies. My point is that there are helpful and less helpful ways of using all these media. Our church does not have a screen. I have also led worship in churches where screens have been used. One thing I have noticed,… Read more »
Where reading skills cannot be assumed there are options – the traditional one is lining out, but the use of shorter texts from Taize or Iona can help, as can consistent use of a congregational mass setting (or other musical setting if the service is mattins or evensong). I can still sing mattins with the tunes used 3-4 times at a church I attended for a year over a decade ago. I’ve often heard it opined that sung services exclude people, but they’re actually one of the quickest routes to belonging.
One of my favourite memories from the early days of the charismatic renewal in the 1970s was how people from our church would come back from weekend conferences with some new songs they had learned, which they would then teach to our house groups. When I say ‘learned’, I mean ‘learned by heart’—they were short, ‘Scripture in Song’ type choruses, easily memorised, with easy tunes. For quite a while we had no actual song books in out house groups – all the songs were learned and sung by memory.
The charismatic renewal in the 1970s… and the sweet Holy Spirit… you make me feel nostalgia for a certain moment in time! Song was a precious part of gently opening ourselves to Jesus in gathered community. As someone once put it, ‘the gentle breeze of Jesus’.
“Lord Jesus Christ, you have come to us, you are one with us, Mary’s son…”
It was a lovely time, wasn’t it, Susannah? We could exchange song lists: ‘Jesus is Changing Me’, ‘All Over the World’, ‘The Joy of the Lord is My Strength’, ‘We are One in the Spirit’, ‘Jesus, Take Me as I Am’, ‘Hallelujah, My Father’ (and all those Fisherfolk songs played on twelve string guitars!)
‘Jesus take me as I am…’ the memories come back. We would also sing: ‘Alleluia, alleluia, give thanks to the risen Lord’, ‘Seek ye first the kingdom of God’, ‘Open our eyes Lord, we want to see Jesus’, ‘Jesus name above all names’, ‘I am the bread of life’, ‘Bind us together, Lord’, ‘He is Lord’. What I particularly remember from those days was the peace and gentleness, and sense of quietness in the presence of Jesus. Some subsequent expressions of charismatic worship, have seemed sort of loud and excitable by comparison. But as I discovered at an exorcism once,… Read more »
I completely resonate with all of this, Susannah. I also firmly believe that I would not have become a committed Christian had it not been for the charismatic renewal. Traditional church had not interested me at all, and when I first read Dennis Bennett’s ‘Nine O’Clock in the Morning’ it totally astounded me that he was telling stories of a real God who did real things in the lives of real people. Once I read that, I was on a search to experience it for myself. Of course, there were lots of weaknesses and half truths, but I’m still deeply… Read more »
There were a number of books which encouraged me, but I only encountered them after my ‘born again’ experience. I found Dennis Bennett’s was one. Also Colin Urquhart’s ‘When the Spirit Comes’ and many sermons by David Watson. But my ‘new birth’ and experience of ‘Baptism with the Holy Spirit’ took place in the Highlands, and I experienced these things first-hand before I’d read any of those books. I didn’t even know the ‘gospel message’ of how I might be saved. I had a very bad car crash, and next day wept tears of repentance, fell asleep, and when I… Read more »
Thanks for sharing that story, Susannah. That’s the kind of thing that grabbed my attention in ‘Nine O’Clock in the Morning’ – a real God doing real things in the lives of real people, not just a theological concept.
What a wonderfully redemptive story from the Archbishop of York about his education in coastal Essex. Local boy made good when he became a much loved Bishop of Chelmsford and has now gone onto even higher things. His story reminded me of nothing more that the book A Kestrel for a Knave which was made in to the film Kes by that great Socalist Ken Loach. The school scenes in that book and film were truly appalling – especially the game of football which brought back nightmare memories. I was always among the last to be chosen and like Billy… Read more »
At it’s most extreme, there is the Nash philosophy that you should target the future elite in the hope they will influence society for the better when they are in positions of power and influence. This morphed into the Irwene camps and Titus Trust.
The leadership of both the conservative evangelical and the charismatic wings of the Church of England have been heavily public school. Holy Trinity Brompton had at least two Old Etonian vicars followed by a Marlborough alumnus. John Stott was at Rugby, where he came under Nash’s influence.
Oh, is that where it originated? As a CECU/Campus Crusade convert in the 70’s a friend said it was their deliberate policy to target ‘future leaders’. It seemed a bit one sided at the time; fifty years on, looking at our society suggests it may not have worked very well. The early charismatic movement was pretty well private/public school and university orientated as well and, in the branch I was most involved with, tended to reflect the social / intellectual ideologies of the academic world its leaders came from. The ‘Restoration’ end on the other hand tended to reflect the… Read more »
Helen King’s comments on lay v ordained ministry struck a chord with me. For all the lip service we pay to it, not to mention our increasing reliance on it, many in the Church still do not see lay ministry as ‘proper ministry’ or approach it with the fundamental seriousness that we apply to ordained ministry. In my previous diocese a recently arrived diocesan secretary with a brief to make savings thought the way forward was to remove commissioned lay ministry from the Ministry Department and relocate it in the HR Department under a newly created Directorship. The person spec… Read more »
Ordain all readers – NOW. Abolish the position. Some readers of my acquaintance would make better incumbents than some ordained clergy. Some readers of my acquaintance are better educated theologically and have more pastoral experience than some ordained clergy – and yet they are still made to jump through hoops dreamt up by those who think they are dealing with infants. It would be good to think that those in charge of ministry and training were themselves experienced and well educated. As I say, it would be good. IMO the whole shebang needs to be centralised.
I’d not want to turn all lay ministers into ordained ones. Lay ministry is a distinctive vocation that is valuable in its own right. Suitably experienced Readers/ LLMs can be given pastoral charge of parishes – I know several. My concern is about the lack of checks and balances regarding how lay ministers, especially those who are not Readers, are trained. Ordination pathways are approved by the Ministry Division QiF Panel, which includes scrutinising the qualifications of those who teach on them. TEIs, which also train some lay ministers, are regularly inspected. But if a diocese trains lay ministers ‘in… Read more »
You have just made Jane’s point for her.
In TEC, virtually anyone can be a “reader”–we’ve had people as young as 12 do it in our parish. All that’s required is the ability to read and speak clearly. Of course, some of us are better than others, but a little practice can make a big difference.
Pat That is not what is being discussed here. In the Church of England the term “Reader” is used to refer to a particular form of lay ministry, thus to quote from the CofE website: How do I become a Reader or Lay Minister? Before becoming a Reader / Licensed Lay Minister you will take part in a process of discernment. If recommended, you will be training through your diocese and be given a licence as evidence of your training and ongoing accountability. Training courses vary, so visit your diocese’s website to find out more. Your starting point is to… Read more »
So, then, what does a “Reader” do in the CoE?
Try this, for starters
https://www.churchofengland.org/about/leadership-and-governance/legal-services/canons-church-england/section-e#b97
All right, I understand. The things a Reader can do in the CoE can all be done by any lay person in TEC, save for distributing the Eucharist or presiding at a burial. In TEC, distributing the Eucharist would be done by a Lay Eucharistic Minister (or LEM) and is generally only so that the homebound can receive Communion. I am unaware of any circumstance at which a lay person can preside at a burial in TEC (correct me if I’m wrong, TEC members).
I think you missed the key point, namely that Readers are authorised to preach sermons.
Yes, I missed that, buried as it were in the midst of a list of other things that, in TEC, are permitted for any lay person: “to read Morning and Evening Prayer… to read the word of God… to catechize the children, and to receive and present the offerings of the people;”
OTOH, I have been at TEC services (in my own parish) where lay persons have delivered the sermon, with the text approved by the rector.
I think possibly, Pat, you have not taken on board that a C of E ‘Reader’ whilst being a lay person is a Minister, a member of the clergy team, albeit not ordained but licensed always by the Diocesan Bishop. They officiate in the same way as a priest with just the few limitations reserved to a priest already mentioned: Communion, benediction and absolution, although they use a suitable modification for the last: “our sins” instead of “your sins”. On this thread, a Reader mentions that his training was for three years to degree standard. Apparently it can vary from… Read more »
I guess what I am noting is that, with the exception of distributing the Eucharist, a lay person in TEC can do all those things without any special training or education. Perhaps what we are seeing is the difference between an established church and one that is not.
I can’t see any connection whatsoever with the fact of the C of E being established. It’s a distinct lay Ministry under the authority of the Diocesan Bishop, not an ad hoc arrangement. Tim Chesterton has explained the virtually identical situation in Canada which might well owe its origins historically to the C of E. Readers in England were also formerly usually called ‘Lay Readers’. The modern term, although not invariable, is ‘Licensed Lay Minister’. As I said, they usually robe when officiating in church. It really can’t be explained much more clearly.
Quite so R.W. with regard to the Canadian situation–which has evolved. The Canadian ministry of lay reader owes its origins to C of E practice, and was furthered by various missionary societies. A Layreader in outport Newfoundland in days of yore was often a local school teacher licensed by the bishop to ‘read’ ( i.e. officiate at ) Morning/Evening prayer for the congregation, conduct funerals, catechize and so forth. During my time in the diocese of Western Newfoundland, I was chaplain to Layreaders. In my home diocese, when I first began in parish ministry, there were two categories of Lay… Read more »
Rod, it might be helpful for folk outside of Canada to know that there is no uniform Canadian practice when it comes to Lay Readers (including what they are called!). For example, Canon 4 of the Constitution and Canons of my Diocese of Edmonton is the canon on Lay Ministry. After a general preamble about the parameters of lay ministry, it establishes four categories of licensed lay ministers: Lay Administrants (that is, eucharistic ministers), Lay Readers, Lay Pastoral Visitors, and Lay Evangelists. For each of them except Lay Administrants, there is a volunteer diocesan warden supervising their training and ongoing… Read more »
Good point, Tim. I recall attending a liturgy in a parish in Montreal some years ago, while visiting family. The rector was away. A Layreader did morning prayer; but at the end somewhere, gave out Holy Communion from the reserved sacrament. Not something I had seen before in terms of either MP or Layreaders.
Lay people can distribute the Eucharist. They cannot be the celebrant of the Eucharist.
Yes they can. It’s called lay presidency
You should move to Sydney Diocese for that. Unfortunately they’re not Anglicans.
Of course they are Anglicans.
They are Plymouth Brethren.
Not permitted in the Church of England! (?)
Laus Deo
You need to broaden your outlook. We are Anglicans. It is permitted with the Anglican Communion
My outlook is broad enough.
The Anglican Communion is a bit of a rag bag.
In Sydney I would have to cross the Tiber I fear!!
Just for clarity, LLMs are able to preside at burials in the Church of England.
Anybody can preside at a burial in the Church of England.
No they can’t….
… as was made clear to Canon Mpho Tutu van Furth.
She was prevented from conducting a service in her capacity as an ordained person. If she had relinquished her position as an ordained person she could not have been prevented from leading a service
See this link for the rules (or lack of rules)
https://www.funeralpartners.co.uk/help-advice/arranging-a-funeral/who-can-conduct-a-funeral-service/
Yes they can ! The conduct of a funeral service is not a legally regulated activity. (The disposal of human remains is subject to regulation but it is disingenuous to conflate that with this thread). If you are referring to the fact clergy need to agree to what goes on in their church, fair enough, but again disingenuous. No licence. qualification, professional membership or any other limitation is required of a person to conduct a funeral service Charles, you know perfectly well that what I am saying is correct. It’s a really important public issue. Please don’t confuse the issue… Read more »
Your assertion is contradicted in clear language by Canons E4 and E7 of the Church of England. The clergy and laity are equally subject to the Bishop’s jurisdiction.
I’m not making assertions. Google “who can take a funeral”. It’s publicly available facts. The answer is anybody can take a funeral
No, that won’t do. Your own comment which started the discussion was “Anybody can preside at a burial in the Church of England.” This discussion has been wholly in the context of the Church of England, by implication its churches and churchyards, all fully and strictly subject to Church law and the Canons. The Canons equally prescribe the duties of C of E clergy and ministers conducting a C of E funeral at a crematorium. Google does not address these matters. In our secular society people increasingly take no notice, or are ignorant, of Church law. Google and Wikipedia, both… Read more »
You have redirected the question ! Of course The Church of England has authority over its own land just as you and I do if we hold title to any land . That is not the issue.
The fact is that conducting a funeral is not a legally regulated activity. That is simply an issue of fact, Rowland.
Anybody can do it. The original point was the puncture of the conceit that licenced lay ministers are qualified to do something nobody else (in the laity) can do.
Anyone can take a funeral outside of Church of England premises. otherwise there would be no humanist, wiccan or pagan ceremonies. .A licence is required for the officiant at a Church ceremony.
This is a link to a very helpful website dealing with burials on private land for which there are legal restrictions: the local authority, Environment Agency and Registrar General are involved. (This is for England and Wales only and would apply to any C of E involvement in such a burial, for example in a private family cemetery – very rare occurrences, I would suggest.)
http://www.naturaldeath.org.uk/index.php?page=home-burial
In that respect, TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada are very different. We have a long tradition of what we still call ‘Lay Readers’ in the ACC. In my parish we have several of them; they have been through a diocesan training program, they help me lead the service each Sunday, preach regularly, and often lead non-Eucharistic services in my absence. I give them plenty of opportunities to preach, and it’s been wonderful to see each of them grow in their use of their gifts.
Yes – this is what we’d like to see in the C of E. It varies depending on how enlightened the incumbent is -so some LLMs / Readers don’t get to do much while others are valued as part of a ministry team much as Tim describes.
Forgive me for disagreeing, but I think you have correctly stated the problem and then come to the wrong conclusion. 1. Yes, some Readers (many Dioceses now call them Licensed Lay Ministers) are better educated and have more pastoral experience than many ordained clergy. In my own diocese, we ensure they train alongside ordinands in theological college and in the first years (“curacy”) of ordained and licensed ministry, and we see their ministry as parallel to that of the ordained, licensed by the Bishop. 2. Yes, Readers/LLMs are sometimes treated like children, or at least as if they were inferior… Read more »
I am a Reader. My incumbent changed just as I began training. The new incumbent had one conversation with me over the three years of my training. He simply ignored my requests for engagement and support in relation to training projects and assignments. He pulled out of the service at which I was to be licenced four weeks before the service. (It’s the same day every year and you cannot be licenced without the support of your incumbent). He had another engagement that day The truth that dare not speak its name is that too many clergy have no time… Read more »
No forgiveness necessary! I like an argument/discussion. I understand what you say. As I get older I know less and less what priests are actually for. It seems to me that the only function reserved to them in the CofE is what an evangelical friend of mine refers to as the magic stuff at HC. I suppose I’m a Wesleyan who likes dressing up and putting on a good show (“poor man’s opera”) to lift people toward the divine but I don’t see why the performance of the cosmic drama, whether done simply or with great magnificence, requires a priest… Read more »
‘As I get older I know less and less what priests are actually for.’ I am less clear then why you want to ordain all Readers?
Me too. I hardly know what I think or why I think it. I “have the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time” though whether I retain the ability to function is moot.
Priesthood of all believers. Ordain everyone or no-one. People can be trained for functions without the nonsense of ontological change or of “being set aside”.
It may not be official Anglican belief but I think Confirmation is, or should be, the entry into the (priestly?) ministry of the ‘laos theou’. That’s how it was experienced by me. The gifts of the people of God in Christ come in all sorts of shapes, sizes and combinations. It is, or should be, one of the main tasks of those in leadership positions to identify, develop and put to use people’s gifts. Those leaders should then share and delegate every (!) one of their ministerial functions with those with the appropriate gifts, after they (when necessary) have had… Read more »
“It may not be official Anglican belief but I think Confirmation is, or should be, the entry into the (priestly?) ministry of the ‘laos theou’.”
Does someone become a member of the laous theou by choice upon making a conscious commitment (confirmation) or is membership conferred by God (baptism, including infant baptism). I can see arguments for both views. Throughout most of my life I would have argued for confirmation but increasingly I worry about the emphasis this places on human agency rather than divine grace and power.
I can’t forsee this idea catching on in the Universal Church. On the other hand , it might be good if the Supreme Pontiff, Vicar of Christ, Bishop of Rome was a nice married laywoman.
Something like this was the subject of Robert Harris’s “Conclave” – the fictional Benitez, Pope Innocent, was not a married laywoman but … I’ll stop there so as not to spoil the fun. It’s a good read.
That would be a major step forwards.
Presumably that is why you are a Methodist?
Calling sacramental ministry ‘The magic stuff’ is to rather miss much of the point.
If you are to comment on my words, please read them attentively. FWIW I know of few people more sacramental than some Methodists and the Wesleys put most of us to shame.
Well why talk about ‘Magic Stuff’ ?
Andy, I have been a Licensed Lay Minister in the Salisbury Diocese for the past 8 years, (although I handed my Licence back to my Bishop a few months back as I had lost faith in the CofE’s governance structures, I now work freelance across various denominations). My LLM training provided by the diocese was to degree level, over three years, and awarded by Oxford Brookes University. I agree with you about Reader (LLM) ministry. I like the phrase that a reader has a vocation to “teach, preach, and lead worship”. And importantly, note what comes first and last. Whilst… Read more »
You could, of course, adopt the late Gerald Coates’ infamous ‘Modest Suggestions’ if you really wanted to modernise and radicalise the who shebang….
Yes – what Jane says. I see this all over the place (not in my diocese thankfully). And like her I have reluctantly come to think some centralization of lay ministry and training for it is necessary.
I am no longer a member of National Ministry Council but I believe Helen King is. Maybe she would like to bring this forward for discussion there.
I already am, Jane! But it’s tough coming on to that when the various plans for 10,000 lay-led worshipping communities are already in play (although I have no idea how they are supposed to happen). Following the last General Synod, funding of training for lay ministry is also on the agenda of the RMF initiative, at least to assist candidates with disabilities. See E.g. https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2022/15-july/news/uk/general-synod-digest-funding-to-stretch-lay-ministry
The phrase ‘Never mind the quality, feel the width’ springs to mind. I wish you well in raising these issues which many will not want to hear. If you’d like a virtual coffee sometime …
but we can’t use that lay ministry funding for things already happening – so it can’t go to support e.g. LLM training – this is what was supposed to happen when we first proposed funding lay ministry training through Vote 1!
Hi Helen, Just picking up on your comments about 10,000 worshipping communities. Can I offer something left-field, but I think could be valuable, on that? There are well over 4,000 C of E schools – each one of them doing Collective worship, sometimes ‘all together’ as a school, other times as a class. Counting each of those classrooms as a worshipping community means that we create 1,000’s of lay-led worshipping communities every year !! That’s not semantics – Collective worship in a class can be extremely deep and meaningful and authentically Christian – I remember last year being blown away… Read more »
Adrian Hilton. I have sympathy with Adrian Hilton, but he confuses Christianity with the institutional CofE. The two have little to do with each other. What Hilton likes, as do I, is the colour, the drama, the order, the ritual, the beauty and its (diminishing) links with national identity. The focus of all this being Jesus the Christ is merely an historical accident. The ritual, beauty etc could just as well be directed at the Great Onion (a remarkable chromosomal constitution, so worthy of worship), or The Sun, or Adrian Hilton, or Kim Jong-un, or a political “-ism” (Nuremberg rallies were hugely impressive). In the past… Read more »
I couldn’t agree more Prof Monkhouse, We had, as Hilton implies, a glimpse of the former Church of England at its best during the funeral rites of Her Majesty. Here was solemnity, ritual and grandeur. But now we can return to mediocrity. It was as if the Royal Shakespeare Company had decided it would get more bums on seats if they reproduced episodes of Coronation Street instead of the boring old Bard .By becoming an evangelical sect, the leadership of the CofE has ensured it will hastily disappear into oblivion. Who needs to watch an amateur singer/guitarist in Church each… Read more »
His whole piece needs reading in light of the class piece as it absolutely smacks of a very middle class idea of Christianity. I have lost count of the times people talk about the mystery and wonder of this supposed past as they talk about their congregations about to close. Where does this style actually exist? Cathedrals? For all their lauded revivals most are struggling financially with some about to go bust and how many wouldn’t turn up without a professional choir?
The much ‘lauded revival’ of cathedrals (one constantly cited by the powerful, and evidently insecure, cathedrals ‘lobby’ within the Church) is, in my view, largely counterfeit. This is because a few cathedrals on the tourist trail do very well, whilst others bump along, and not a few struggle. Over the last year I have attended services in a number of cathedrals over the last 12 months (including 4 over the last week: 1 in Kent, 1 in Greater London and 2 in Lancashire): at one of these I was, for at least part of the service, a third of the… Read more »
I’ve noticed this curtailed attendance in several countries. So long as the curious are courteous and discreet (phones off, please!), I don’t mind it: who knows what spark of faith’s been lit?
Does it flatter the numbers? Maybe, if the tourists should be counted differently. Alternatively, if they’re unchurched, they’re exactly who we want to be attending.
Many thanks. I am not complaining about it per se: whether people come into say some quick prayers (something I have done on many occasions) or to gawp is a matter of comparative indifference to me. People have their own motives, and who am I to judge? However, what I am complaining about is the tendency for cathedrals to proclaim their ‘success’ relative to parish churches (i.e., that they should be in receipt of significant financial support not accorded to parish churches) when in fact the ‘success’ is skewed very heavily towards a small number of cathedrals, and in large… Read more »
Crypto-tourists certainly aren’t grounds to grab extra funds unavailable to (non-beacon) churches. On this, we agree.
Since they’re different in kind, it’s sad if cathedrals and churches end up in competition. Not to mention ironic given cathedrals’ origins as episcopal seats at best indifferent to the laity.
Is this wrangling inevitable with centralized funding? I fear so, but that’s a whole other topic …
‘Here was solemnity, ritual and grandeur. But now we can return to mediocrity.’
As a small church rector, I’ve had enough with being beaten over the head with the cathedral worship ideal.
Exactly why I’ve repeatedly defended contemporary worship styles. Certain cathedrals and parishes excel in traditional worship, but it’s one option among many.
For that matter, why not have more contemporary services in cathedrals alongside Mattins and Evensong? They’re incredible stages and would lend themselves to it as well as anywhere.
One man’s ‘solemnity, ritual and grandeur’ is another woman’s ‘stuffy, cold, and moribund’. We’re all different, and different styles of worship enable us to approach God. That’s how it should be. ‘In my Father’s house are many mansions.’
Quite so, Janet.
Even from a nonbeliever’s POV, Jesus of Nazareth’s deeds and teaching are surely central to Christianity’s rituals being beautiful and profound as opposed to something less appealing (be that the pungent Great Onion or the … last two examples given!). Other faiths can be equally so, but due to their own particular merits: the object of worship isn’t incidental. I again find myself in the odd position of defending my evangelical brethren: openness to learning from other traditions has been mainstream in evangelicalism for decades now, whether that’s incorporating Christian mysticism or the ubiquitous tea-lights (which can aid prayerful focus… Read more »
You have definitely identified a real difference. I am unapologetically a Jesus person. So, by the way, is the presiding bishop of TEC (definitely not an evangelical); he explicitly identifies TEC as part of ‘The Anglican branch of the Jesus Movement. Quite honestly, if it’s not about Jesus I can’t see the point. And by the way, the original Anglo-Catholics agreed: “All for Jesus, all for Jesus…”
Me too. I’m on about whether one accepts that beauty etc can be a way to Jesus – that is to say, does one accept the pulling power of sights, sounds, smells, actions as well as words, or is it Is all word-based? I’m no anglocatholic: as I said elsewhere if I have to pigeon-hole myself, I’m a Wesleyan (O for a thousand tongues) who likes a good show to lift people to the divine. The good show does not need to be cathedrally (I find them snobby and precious) but smart and reasonably seemly.without being ossified.
Yup…. It’s “Christians” not “Godians”… Clues in the name…
I want to say how grateful I am for the House of Survivors Round Up of 2022. Not only as a member of General Synod, but would hope any concerned Anglican would be, it is very useful to have reports, reviews, responses, collated in this way with links. Is there a way to make sure this made widely available, perhaps starting with GS members in all Houses?
Thank you Judith for your appreciation of House of Survivors site. I hope Synod members are already sharing the site and coming to understand the body of narrative wisdom it holds. A niche site in many ways – not pointing to an organisation or something to join – rather, it’s about promoting central issues and experiences that many survivors share in our dealings from this Church, evidenced and laid out in clear and accessible categories. Not comfortable reading, but we hope all Synod members will take time to read the material and get as well informed as possible. This will… Read more »
Licenced lay ministers are just members of a congregation. They have no authority to do any task at all that cannot equally be done by any other member of a congregation. The legal significance of the licence is very specific. It simply means you can engage in regular activity. That is important, particularly if you are any good at something. But that is all. If, like me, you are a licenced lay minister and you want to protest that the role is in some sense a separate order of ministry, you will find the clue in the name of the… Read more »
That may be true in some provinces, but in the Church of England Licensed Lay Ministers are members of the Order of Readers, and can preach in services of worship, something that other lay people (unless authorised by the Bishop) cannot do.
That is correct. As the title makes clear, they are licensed – by their bishop.
Clergy can ask anybody to preach at a service and often do. The issue is often misunderstood, including by yourself. The regulations allow bishops to maintain a general control of the conduct of services within their diocese. Clergy cannot just delegate everything on an ad hoc basis and spend their Sunday mornings in bed. If anybody is going to regularly carry out public ministry it has to be licenced by the bishop That is quite different from flattering the conceit of LLMs or anybody else that they are qualified to do something that nobody else in the congregation can do.… Read more »
Canon B18 (2)
https://www.churchofengland.org/about/leadership-and-governance/legal-services/canons-church-england/section-b
You make my point for me ! In accordance with diocesan directions is the basis on which many many people are invited to preach as guest speakers
You really are straining on a gnat !
Unless you live in a secluded order – which is possible and perfectly respectable – you know perfectly well that all sorts of people will be preaching in Church of England churches this Sunday.
I hope you won’t be offended by this question, but what is your position, if any, within the Church of England? Your comments convey an impression that you may be from another Anglican Province where entirely different rules can prevail.
I think there’s some flexibility and commonsense involved in all this. When I was exploring vocation through the ACCM process, my vicar invited me to preach several times. I suspect, as Peter says, that practice will vary depending on various incumbents. That isn’t the same as calling to the role of Reader though. When it comes to vocation to a formally-recognised role in the Church, it’s more than an ad hoc arrangement. Exploring vocation is not just about an individual doing it themselves (though that’s part of it), but something to be explored and overseen by the Church as a… Read more »
I think you mean “Office of Reader”. There is no “Order of Reader”, there being only three Orders in the Church, those of Deacon, Priest and Bishop.
There is no such thing as an order of readers. It’s an office. The two are not the same.
Rowland, I’m not at all offended by your perfectly reasonable query. I am a Reader in the Church of England.
What have I said that you think is not true in the Church of England ?
Thank you for that clarification. My understanding is that the Diocesan Bishop retains authority and ultimate control of all public worship in the C of E. He or she can delegate and does so in accordance with the Canons. I’m wondering how much variation in practice (rather than strict adherence to the Canons) there is between different dioceses. I have listened to hundreds of sermons including many by Readers or LLMs, always robed in my rural neck of the woods, preaching mostly to a high standard. I only know of one Lay Worker, but assumed that he also is licensed… Read more »